Facilitator: Tezira Lore Participants: Ramkumar Bendapudi, Satyavan Singh and Amosse Maheme Note taking: Ewen Le BorgneandTezira Lore
What is going well?
Both country teams have developed some training materials (posters, charts and manuals) and shared these at meetings at the village level. They have been useful in creating awareness during the inception of the project.
In India, the posters on goat husbandry were prepared by vets and agricultural extension experts (in English then translated to the local language) and are mainly used to train the field guides. It was found that practical demonstrations e.g. on improved goat feeding practices are work better than posters for communicating with the farmers. Also, sketch diagrams are more effective than photos.
There are good internal flows of information at the country level from the field to the head office. In India, the system of collecting information from specific households is going well because there are good linkages. Monthly progress reports are being communicated by the field guides and supervisors to the program office and head office.
In Mozambique, communication of internal planning is being done well. There is joint planning and communication so that everyone from the project manager to the field officer is aware of planned activities for the next 3 months.
Cross-country communication about the IPs is being done mainly through the IP reports which are circulated by ILRI. In the case of India, Ramkumar reads through the report, extracts some summary information and communicates this verbally to the field teams when he meets them.
Joint workshops that bring together the India and Mozambique teams have been useful forums for exchange and information sharing. However, while the Mozambique team has visited India twice, the India teams have not been to Mozambique to see and learn.
What is not going so well?
The content of the posters developed by the India team is too technical for the farmers so there is need to customize these products to suit the needs of the village-level audiences.
Unreliable internet connectivity in Jharkhand (due to unreliable electricity supply) and differences in levels of connectivity between BAIF and ILRI mean that email communication internally among partners is not always the best mode of communication for timely information exchange, e.g. ILRI has reliable internet access and the organization's communication culture is very email-centric while in the field in India, communication is mainly via mobile phone (calls/SMS) and face to face and people may check their email once a day in the evening.
Language barriers in Mozambique hinder communication because many local staff speak Portuguese and are not fluent in English while not many international staff speak Portuguese.
Not all field staff in Mozambique have internet access so getting/sharing information internally about planned activities could be a problem.
It is sometimes hard to match research goals of ILRI and the development goals of the NGO partners as they have different processes and priorities. This might affect how the organizations communicate and share information.
How can we improve?
Customize some of the training materials (posters) to make them more user-friendly for farmers.
Improve the data collection method by creating a database and template for data collection (India). A central repository for information would also improve accessibility at all levels, especially in electronic format.
Improve data collection systems in the field and improve feedback flows with the field guides (Mozambique)
Use photo stories and drawings to create interest, explain key processes and allow the different country teams to learn from each other about different approaches being used e.g. pasture management, improved goat housing. Goat fairs are being planned for Udaipur. The team in Udaipur could learn from photo stories about the experience of Mozambique colleagues with organizing goat fairs.
Farmer case studies to highlight successful uptake of approaches at the village level
Generally there are some products developed by both teams./
At village level, posters were useful for communities, but in India particularly for field guides. They're a bit difficult for farmers.
Practical demonstrations work better than use of photographs;
Use of photographs could be improved.
Internal communication works well in the teams;
In Moz, internal planning from field office to project management works well so everyone knows how things are organized.
Re: data collection, there is a system in place but there are areas where it can improve e.g. access to data collected (which is sometimes kept in a central repository at a higher level).
One challenge: unreliable internet connectivity which hampers online communication.
At ILRI, we focus mostly on emails and internet but in e.g. Jharkhand the connection is not always reliable, not everyone checks their emails so it's less reliable.
Different institutions have different priorities e.g. ILRI's research agenda vs. NGOs' development agenda.
Lessons learnt:
Posters need to be adapted to farmers;
What we could do:
Improve data collection methods;
Develop learning across teams thorugh e.g. photo stories about improved goat feeding (looking at pictures).
imGoats project: Learning and reflection workshop
Udaipur, India, 2-6 July 2012
Our lessons learnt about communication
Facilitator: Tezira LoreParticipants: Ramkumar Bendapudi, Satyavan Singh and Amosse Maheme
Note taking: Ewen Le Borgne and Tezira Lore
What is going well?
What is not going so well?
How can we improve?
Generally there are some products developed by both teams./
At village level, posters were useful for communities, but in India particularly for field guides. They're a bit difficult for farmers.
Practical demonstrations work better than use of photographs;
Use of photographs could be improved.
Internal communication works well in the teams;
In Moz, internal planning from field office to project management works well so everyone knows how things are organized.
Re: data collection, there is a system in place but there are areas where it can improve e.g. access to data collected (which is sometimes kept in a central repository at a higher level).
One challenge: unreliable internet connectivity which hampers online communication.
At ILRI, we focus mostly on emails and internet but in e.g. Jharkhand the connection is not always reliable, not everyone checks their emails so it's less reliable.
Different institutions have different priorities e.g. ILRI's research agenda vs. NGOs' development agenda.
Lessons learnt:
What we could do: